It should be pretty obvious that a decentralized network that many use specifically to not be connected to centralized networks houses mostly people who do not wish to have their posts bridged to B...
Bottom line is, if people are concerned of having their conversation and content distributed out of their intended audiences, we’ll all have to move to a fully encrypted network, where every message can only be decoded by the intended recipients. Getting upset because other people are not agreeing to your expectations of privacy is pointless.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that platforms you’re not a member don’t host content you create in order to make it look at though their platform is more popular and vibrant than it is, thus generating revenue of which you’re not going to get a share of.
Can we please get out of this tribal mindset? The thing about decentralized systems is that it lets everyone where they want to be without being forced into a walled garden. Why should I care about the platform that other people are using, if I can reach them just the same?
Who cares if Bluesky or Nostr become more popular than ActivityPub? As long as the “platform” is open source and not actively working to hold its users as hostages, we should praise and hope they get to grow as large as possible. We should be fighting against the big corporations, not the small independent developers. There are almost 3 billion people using Twitter/Facebook/Reddit/TikTok. They are the ones that we should be actively engaging and trying to win them over to our side.
And neither via federation like in AP. It’s a bit of a hole that should the technology get truly big will eventually come to a head.
We already had lawsuits in Germany related to linking to copyright infringing content, it’s not a big stretch that if you scrape or federate a link that could infringe, you are in turn infringing.
Where exactly does a “platform” end? Is it only lemmy.tf, or all Lemmy instances? Either way Mastodon or Peertube can hardly be considered to be the same platform as Lemmy. Activitypub is a protocol and definitely not a platform. Or would you consider threads.net part of your “platform” once it implements Activitypub?
That’s a good question. We have the Lemmy platform, but that’s built on the wider ActivityPub platform. So I would consider threads part of the platform.
No. There is a difference in context and intent.
Bottom line is, if people are concerned of having their conversation and content distributed out of their intended audiences, we’ll all have to move to a fully encrypted network, where every message can only be decoded by the intended recipients. Getting upset because other people are not agreeing to your expectations of privacy is pointless.
I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that platforms you’re not a member don’t host content you create in order to make it look at though their platform is more popular and vibrant than it is, thus generating revenue of which you’re not going to get a share of.
Can we please get out of this tribal mindset? The thing about decentralized systems is that it lets everyone where they want to be without being forced into a walled garden. Why should I care about the platform that other people are using, if I can reach them just the same?
Who cares if Bluesky or Nostr become more popular than ActivityPub? As long as the “platform” is open source and not actively working to hold its users as hostages, we should praise and hope they get to grow as large as possible. We should be fighting against the big corporations, not the small independent developers. There are almost 3 billion people using Twitter/Facebook/Reddit/TikTok. They are the ones that we should be actively engaging and trying to win them over to our side.
Assuming you hold rights to your content in the legal system you’d be claiming the damages in, you are of course free to file a lawsuit.
That raises a point, what is the process regarding DMCA and GDPR? There’s no mechanism to delete posts via scraped content.
And neither via federation like in AP. It’s a bit of a hole that should the technology get truly big will eventually come to a head.
We already had lawsuits in Germany related to linking to copyright infringing content, it’s not a big stretch that if you scrape or federate a link that could infringe, you are in turn infringing.
But with AP, you can purge content. When you scrape content, there’s no way to get a purge notice.
Where exactly does a “platform” end? Is it only lemmy.tf, or all Lemmy instances? Either way Mastodon or Peertube can hardly be considered to be the same platform as Lemmy. Activitypub is a protocol and definitely not a platform. Or would you consider threads.net part of your “platform” once it implements Activitypub?
That’s a good question. We have the Lemmy platform, but that’s built on the wider ActivityPub platform. So I would consider threads part of the platform.